2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
I have no idea what is meant by "linguistic term." PTSD used to just be called "shell shock" or "combat fatigue." They describe the same condition. Are they "linguistic terms?"
I don't know what linguistic term means in this context either. In ordinary usage, I would understand "linguistic term" to mean a term that relates to the study of language.
Was there a time in history when the word gender only referred to language? If so, I certainly learned something today.
PTSD nor anything else you're describing are not and never were linguistic terms.
Gender's evolution from something describing noun classes to a medical issue is almost certainly unparalleled.
Ontologically speaking, as you dive deeper, many ideas lose meaning. Gender only becomes more meaningful. We are going to have to figure it out.
I see people on the right who oppose trans making the argument that gender doesn’t exist. This isn’t a winning strategy over the long term.
I don't know what linguistic term means in this context either. In ordinary usage, I would understand "linguistic term" to mean a term that relates to the study of language.
I think if you replace "linguistic" with "grammatical" in Luckbox' original post it makes more sense. At least if I am understanding it correctly now.
appealing to the infallibility of doctors seems like a bad idea for anyone who has ever opened up a history book.
Ontologically speaking, as you dive deeper, many ideas lose meaning. Gender only becomes more meaningful. We are going to have to figure it out.
I see people on the right who oppose trans making the argument that gender doesn’t exist. This isn’t a winning strategy over the long term.
That's actually the left's argument and correct arguments shouldn't be shied away from just because they're unpopular.
Do you question every single scientific development and advance? If not, why not? Your answer to this question will also give you the answer to your question above.
Every single one? No, of course not. How could I? However, I do question a lot of them. Views around psychiatry and AGI are the first one that comes to mind, but there are plenty of others. Psychiatric medicine is still in its infancy, and it's clear that we've made mistakes and still don't know what we're doing. Science around gender affirming care is even newer, and there aren't even long-term studies that can be cited. We don't anything.
Every single one? No, of course not. How could I? However, I do question a lot of them. Views around psychiatry and AGI are the first one that comes to mind, but there are plenty of others. Psychiatric medicine is still in its infancy, and it's clear that we've made mistakes and still don't know what we're doing. Science around gender affirming care is even newer, and there aren't even long-term studies that can be cited. We don't anything.
What differentiates the advances you do question from those you don't question?
Because you're automatically attracted to the most transparently bad faith, moronic argument in the discussion? Makes sense.
I'm attracted to reason, which you are sorely lacking. Built up in a lot of your bullshit claims and rabid conjectures are myriad assumptions you apparently aren't even aware of. At least Victor is a rational leftist; they are few and far between. I might have met one other in my life. The rest of you seem to have branched off from Calvinism somewhere in the 1600s.
That's exactly what you're doing. It's basically an appeal to authority --- "but doctors say so!" Joseph Mengele was a doctor.
No. But what you're doing is called "strawmanning". The adults are talking now, why don't you go back and read what was posted again, with a dictionary if you need to, and come back if and when you understand it.
I'm attracted to reason, which you are sorely lacking. Built up in a lot of your bullshit claims and rabid conjectures are myriad assumptions you apparently aren't even aware of. At least Victor is a rational leftist; they are few and far between. I might have met one other in my life. The rest of you seem to have branched off from Calvinism somewhere in the 1600s.
Fascinating. Make sure to PM Sklansky with this information so you can claim your rightful place on the list.
I'm attracted to reason, which you are sorely lacking. Built up in a lot of your bullshit claims and rabid conjectures are myriad assumptions you apparently aren't even aware of. At least Victor is a rational leftist; they are few and far between. I might have met one other in my life. The rest of you seem to have branched off from Calvinism somewhere in the 1600s.
90% of your participation in threads is just talking about how smart you are and how stupid everyone else is. Maybe try contributing some interesting posts and letting those posts speak for themselves.
Here’s my challenge to you, MAGA warriors and trump voters, and I guess Victor
I am a leaning liberal moderate who is open minded about the prospect of voting for a republican who thinks trump is an amoral, aspiring demogauge who lies as frequently as he breathes, who is mentally incapable of the job, is just a stupid human being, and because of his moral defects, intellectual defects, and simply the fact that he has shown to be willing to burn it all to the ground to save his ass should never be allowed to be president
Ignore kamala, ignore whataboutism, and on the merits of trump and trump alone prove me wrong
appealing to the infallibility of doctors seems like a bad idea for anyone who has ever opened up a history book.
Doctors surely aren't infallible, and they often do not agree with each other. But for the vast majority of medical decisions, I would rather rely on my doctor's advice than on my own intuition or internet research.
In other words, I think about medicine in much the same way I think about plumbing or a million other things about which I have very limited knowledge.
